Why Some Children Are More Aggressive Than Others? Essay

Violence take multiple forms, many of which are covered in the nightly news. Murder, rape, familial abuse, bullying, workplace hostility, armed robbery—all of these are societal problems with far-reaching repercussions. There have long debates and discussions regarding whether nature or nurture influences individual violent behavior. People are concerned about what makes an individual to engage in violent behavior such murder or burglary among other types of crimes. They are also concerned about what makes people stop such behavior. However, there is no precise conception whether nature, nurture or both influence violence. Some people assume that, violent behavior results from individual’s life experiences or upbringing also known as nurture. Others feel that violent behavior is more complex and results from individual’s genetic character or nature. In other words, it is not clear whether violent behavior is inborn or occurs at some point in persons’ lives, but even it’s hard, emphasizing one and ignoring other influences is always an unwise way to go.

In today’s society, violence occurs every minute somewhere in some shape or form. It continues to be a plague that causes humans humility, pain, and death. Both the scientific and criminal justice fields have been stumped for years by the question of “where does the influence of violence come from?” Nature versus nurture has always been one of the most prevalent arguments relating to this topic. The nature argument is based on the belief that an individual’s biology/DNA contributes to their behavior, where the nurture argument believes that the environment one is exposed to is what actually influences their behavior. According to Hickey, biological positivism was the method of applying the scientific method to the task of determining who was a criminal (48).

After viewing Origins of Human Aggression (The Nature of Things), I learned a lot about origins of human aggression. In the first part of the video, it focused on 2 year old children and how aggression is derived. The video states a study shows that signs of aggression start within the first couple months of a newborn’s life (Maher, Origins of Human Aggression (The Nature of Things). This study within the video I believe is accurate. I was told by my parents that as I grew I began to be more aggressive. The older I got, I began to do things such as: throw objects, hit people, and throw a tantrum if I could not get my way. One time I cried for an hour just so my mother would buy me a pair of shoes. Throwing that tantrum got me my way, but

Social Psychological Theories of Aggression Social learning theorists propose that behaviour, such as aggression is learnt through observation, imitation and behaviour shaping. This behaviour is learnt automatically through observation of male and female role models, for example parents, peers and media characters. Whether or not this behaviour is imitated depends on the type of reinforcement that the role model receives. Vicarious reinforcement involves the outcome of a role models behaviour, for example if a child observes a parent acting aggressively and receiving positive rewards for they are more like to be imitate this behaviour in the future, than they would be if the role model

Aggressive behaviour starts when children reach 2-3 years. They are able to get something from others whenever they want. They are capable of physical aggression. They could get their staff by done by hitting, grabbing and pushing. Physical aggression increase during 2-4 years old, after that it decrease as they learn to control their emotions, communicate and express their frustration. If it doesn’t stop during that age, it will get more problematic because they are growing, growing taller and stronger (video). I think it is high risk for the children. They need a supportive environment, positive guidance, responsive caregiver help to build their foundation. Punishment is not a good way to teach children (parenting style). It will increase

Aggression is a natural part of human behavior, and can even be adaptive in certain situations. However, when aggression manifests itself in violent behaviors, it becomes problematic. Patterns of aggression change throughout childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood, and these changes usually differ between males and females (Loeber, 1997). Physical aggression is typically greatest early in life and decreases during adolescence, whereas more serious violence tends to increase with age, particularly during adolescence (Loeber, 1997). Despite the changes that occur in aggressive tendencies throughout childhood and adolescence, aggression is seen as a very stable trait, almost as stable as

During our second weekend class, we talked specifically about violence and youth. For many young people who have already developed a pattern of violent behavior, the probability that this way of life will endure into their adult lives is very likely. I believe that aggression is often learned very early in a child's life. For the growing

In today’s progressive and scientifically advanced world, new studies have occurred that explain how aggression in children can be easily understood. In Alison Gopnik’s article, “Aggression in Children Makes Sense- Sometimes,” she explained how recent scientific experiments have proven that children’s genes and environments, make an impact on their behavior. As human beings, it is hard to decipher the actual cause of aggression in fellow humans because we have not found any accurate evidence until now. Gopnik sufficiently conveys that recent scientific evidence has proven that aggression in children can make sense, by using the results of scientific studies to support her point, and by also using an essential metaphor to further explain a complicated subject.

During our lifetime every one of us feels anger and aggression occasionally, some more than others, maybe as a child in the play ground or later as an adult when somebody cuts you up when you are driving along. But what causes anger and aggression and why do we all suffer from it? Well there are lots of different theories to what causes aggression and where aggressive behaviour comes from. So throughout this essay I will examine the different concepts and theories from different psychologist and develop and show an understanding of Aggression

Meyers and Dewall 2015, has defined aggression as “any act intended to harm someone physically or emotionally.” Ferguson and Beaver 2009 defines aggression as “behavior which is intended to increase the social dominance of the organism relative to the dominance position of other organisms.” This definition is more directed towards the evolutionary influences of violence. Human ancestors lived in a survival of the fittest world. In order to survive, they needed to be the strongest, smartest and most dominant. Another definition from The World Health Organization (2009) states that violence is “the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual against oneself, another person pr against a group or community, that either results in or has high like hood of resulting injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation.” Aggression does not always have to be negative. Violence is accepted in some forms such as for sport, self-defense, defense of others, war, etc. For the purpose of this paper, aggression will be looked at in a negative way. To try to understand violence, the Nature verse Nurture lens will be

Physical assault and aggression is the second leading cause of death among 14 to 17 year olds, next to vehicular accidents (Loeber). But why are humans so aggressive in the first place? There are two sides of the debate: Nature, and Nurture. Some say that it’s human nature, genetics that cause most behaviors, while others say that we act as we learned during childhood. This argument applies to aggression as well. Aggression is mainly caused by things during childhood and adolescence where people learn from various sources about aggression, although, human psychology plays a slight factor.

There are clearly no simple genetic or hormonal factors that can explain the variation in aggressive in males and females. Studies of human males suggest that there is at most a small genetic component to aggression, but a greater one for personality traits associated with such behavior. The biological mechanisms translating the message in the genes into antisocial or criminal behavior are not known. Therefore, there is clearly no simple aggressive gene effect. Many genes are likely to be involved, and each may have a weak effect on aggressive behavior. A direct genetic effect on aggression, for example, may determine how quickly an individual responds to aggravation. Aggression may also be influenced indirectly; for example, a man's size and strength may affect the way he behaves and how others react to him. (Turner, 253)

Previous research concerning peer aggression has been conducted under the assumption that women rarely display aggression; therefore, aggressive behavior has historically been viewed as a male phenomenon (Björkqvist, 1994). Recently, many researchers have challenged the gender bias in the existence of aggressive behaviors and have broadened the definition of aggression. Björkqvist’s research suggests sex differences exist in the quality of the aggression, but not the quantity. According to Paquette and Underwood (1999), an adolescent’s expression of anger and contempt for peers can sometimes be expressed through physical aggression, manipulation, exclusion, and/or gossip. This broader definition allows for

The nature versus nurture debate is an ongoing debate among social scientists relating to whether ones personality/personal characteristics are the result of his/her inherited genetic traits or the result of environmental factors such as upbringing, social status, financial stability, and more. One of the topics that are discussed among psychologists is the study of violent behavior among people as a whole, and in particular, individuals. Social scientists try to explain why people commit acts of violence through explanation of either side of the nature or nurture schools of thought. However, the overwhelming amount of research done into the relation of violent behavior and the nature versus nurture debate indicated that nurture is the primary explanation to explaining violent behavior because violent traits are learned from adults, someone’s social upbringing is a major factor to why some people are more violent than others, and finally influences from news media, movies, and video games enhance the chance for someone to exhibit violent behavior. In conclusion, violent behavior is a complex issue without a clear explanation that is overwhelmingly supported by the nurture side of the debate.

Is how aggressive an individual is determined only by his or her genes? Whether psychological and behavioral traits are purely determined by genetics, solely influenced by socialization, or a combination of both has been a highly debated topic within the field of psychology known as the “nature-nurture issue.” Today, although still disputed, a good number of psychologists and other scientists concur that genetics and the environment mutually influence and intermingle with one another (Myers, 2015). We can partially credit this fizzling-out of the nature-nurture debate to the discoveries made in twin studies. Twin studies are used to help delineate the genetic components of behavior and the socially and culturally influenced components (Myers, 2015). This type of study enables researchers to examine the extent to which genetics and environment have an effect on the development of traits and behavior. For example, in lecture, we learned that a common and natural experiment used in twin studies is to examine a set of twins who grew up in the same household and a set twins who grew up in separate households (K.W. Brown, personal communication, August 29, 2017).